The U.S. foreign policy is thus energy driven and security driven and these factors are integrated to exhibit the American dominance over the world (Bromley, S 2005 p.225 - 227). ‘Blood for oil’ is the term coined by social and political analysts to explain the overt actions of the United States to secure the oil fields in the Middle East.
Michael Klare critises the national security policy of United States in Blood and oil. The author argues that the military and foreign policy of US has been driven by the need to ensure a safe method to source foreign oil specifically from the Middle East. Dependence on oil from foreign sources is continuously gowing and the US forces are deemed to fight to secure oil producing nations and supply routes.
It is further argued that even if the United States diversifies its foreign oil supply sources, there is very less probability that the dependence on Gulf oil would reduce and the diversifiication of sources may increase the probablities of American involvement in conflict in other parts of the world. In the race to secure major shares of oil from other competitive nations, the U.S. is also highly probable to engage in war with China and Russia.
Klare concludes by suggesting methods to reduce the costs involved for oil dependence that comes in the way of war and disharmony. The alternative methods suggested include a better national energy strategy of integrity and autonomy that detaches its method to secure energy from security obligations to governments abroad, reduction of oil consumption and to speed up methods to develop alternative energy sources. In short, Klare critices the foreign policy of U.S. that brings in consequences that are much underappreciated (Klare,M 2004).
The national interest of United States is to remove any encumbrances or obstacles that obstruct the Americans in their pursuit for a better living and happiness. In